Policy Effect change proposals, and your thoughts

Discussion of the newest version of the game
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7969
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Policy Effect change proposals, and your thoughts

Postby cliffski » Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:46 pm

I thought it might be worth a sticky post where we can talk about what policy effects are "wrong" and how they should be changed in later patches. Either new effects, removing existing ones, or tweaks to the equations.
here are two I'm thinking about:

1) The amount of military spending should effect membership of the patriot group over time.
This is because military families tend to be more patriotic, maybe due to the fact that its patriotic voters who give them the most support.

2)Legalising prostitution should reduce crime. Because the activity is no longer underground, it can be regulated and given police protection etc.

Thoughts? suggestions for others?
theadder
Junior Line Supervisor
Junior Line Supervisor
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:59 pm

Postby theadder » Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:47 pm

I managed to have a Crime-free Utopia with an Organized Crime problem earlier. Organized Crime was hovering just barely above the cut-off line while Crime and Violent Crime were 0. Perhaps its because it takes time for Organized Crime to catch up on the other two?
mrstarware
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:02 pm

Postby mrstarware » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:02 pm

I don't think 1 should be changed. There's also some hatred sometimes toward military by military families due to their children, husbands, etc being sent off to war.

2 should probably be changed to lower the crime level, this would probably show the debate of 'if murder were legal would it be an offense?' type of thing. So while the 'crime' would be the same, it would be legal crime. :lol:
Rissen
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:11 pm

Postby Rissen » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:12 pm

I still think that there's no point in having drug legalisation as an option if all it does positively is please liberals a little. I can understand that your view may be that there are no good effects, but what's the point in including it in the game if it's virtually useless?
frost_maze
Line Manager
Line Manager
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 7:09 pm
Location: Londinium

Postby frost_maze » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:31 pm

Shouldn't free school meals affect capitalists/wealthy like its counterpart free eye tests?

Or is it just because I only have the beta version?

And possibly increase how much the liberals like you with the legalisation of drugs. And also, increase GDP by a tiny little bit. Because, after all, it means that companies can mass produce those things and help the economy. But drug addiction would reduce productivity so it *ends up* counteracting each other which isn't the case as is.

And possibly not make it so that every country has hospital overcrowding, contagious diseases, AND asthma epidemic. Nearly. (Gaiatopia doesn't have the asthma epidemic. Guess why. :P)
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7969
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Postby cliffski » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:38 pm

Rissen wrote:I still think that there's no point in having drug legalisation as an option if all it does positively is please liberals a little. I can understand that your view may be that there are no good effects, but what's the point in including it in the game if it's virtually useless?


You make a good point. I assume you are suggesting that crime should drop if drugs are legalised? Currently legalising drugs makes organised crime less likely. What do we think about legalised prostitution reducing organised crime too?
wolfdaddy2002
Senior Line Supervisor
Senior Line Supervisor
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Washington

Postby wolfdaddy2002 » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:49 pm

I think the drop in crime due to legalizing prostitution and / or drugs would be a good idea. Keep in mind that both may also affect forign relations as well. (Either because they support said policy, or were profiting from smuggling). An option about prisons might be an idea as well. I was thinking of say, prison sentences only for certain types of crime. However i can see how that might not be an easy thing at all.
Here's a thought: An event that allows abortion to be covered by State Hospitals?
And i still think the idea of creating our own parties would be good, or at least something that lets us know what our core voters are. As it is, what sort of ministers you get seems kinda random. I just tried playing Conservatives and two of my ministers were Liberal, with one of them being Liberal and parents.
User avatar
Glinka
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 8:12 pm

Re: Policy Effect change proposals, and your thoughts

Postby Glinka » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:51 pm

cliffski wrote:2)Legalising prostitution should reduce crime. Because the activity is no longer underground, it can be regulated and given police protection etc.


The cost to regulate and provide protection, however, should be pretty steep. And once you've legalized it, there should be a good chance that at some point prostitutes begin a press and legal battle for unionization and worker's benefits, which requires you to make some pretty important choices.
Zild
Line Manager
Line Manager
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Postby Zild » Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:59 pm

Perhaps a well-funded military would boost patriotism membership - I would go so far as to say that some military families are practically indoctrinated into patriotism, through constant, heavy exposure to patriotic ideals and events - whilst a poorly-funded one could reduce it due to a higher proportion of families losing loved ones, or fearing that they will do so through poor equipment and training.

Legalising prostitution would reduce crime (particularly organised crime, perhaps?) not only directly because there is one less crime to commit, but also by reducing crimes connected to it, such as assault, because the environment is more regulated. That said, whilst the actual level of crime may go down, the reported level of crime may in fact go up, as more prostitutes are willing to report crimes committed against them. To do so previously would be to face arrest themselves.

Legalising drugs could also result in less organised crime as there is less drug dealing, although the black market would grow bigger. Perhaps legalising drugs should reduce demand on hospitals and the health service in the short term, as people are using drugs in a more-informed manner, but over the long term the demand on the health service (and possibly the crime level) grows steadily as more and more people become addicted. And simply banning drugs again should not undo all of this damage!

I wonder if there is any scope for new policies related to monarchies, in certain nations at least, whereby the level of money spent on them could be reduced or even the monarchy ousted altogether. Patriots may dislike this and it may have a negative effect on tourism (GDP?), but socialists and the poor would probably prefer it.
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7969
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Postby cliffski » Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:09 pm

We could have a monarchy slider to adjust how much they cost :D
People always say that the UK monarchy boosts tourism. it could also maybe boost patriotism. the thing is, funding for the monarchy isn't something that's trivially changed. maybe a slider where it takes 5-6 years to take effect?

Regarding drugs, I think that this is modelled to some extent by the drug addiction situation, although I should revisit this stuff and check I'm happy with all the connections there.
mrstarware
Supreme Robot
Supreme Robot
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:02 pm

Postby mrstarware » Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:24 pm

Zild wrote:

Legalising drugs could also result in less organised crime as there is less drug dealing, although the black market would grow bigger.
Why would the black market grow bigger if organized crime and such got smaller??????

Oh and maybe drugs should be taxable too. :D
Zild
Line Manager
Line Manager
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Postby Zild » Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:09 pm

mrstarware wrote:
Zild wrote:Legalising drugs could also result in less organised crime as there is less drug dealing, although the black market would grow bigger.
Why would the black market grow bigger if organized crime and such got smaller??????

Okay, good point...

The really bad organised crime of drug dealing would no longer exist, but there would potentially be more black market activity if the drugs are taxed heavily - which may or may not be organised crime.
Iudeks
Line Supervisor
Line Supervisor
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Belgium

Postby Iudeks » Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:11 pm

cliffski wrote:We could have a monarchy slider to adjust how much they cost
Better funding of the monarchy could also have a positive effect on the conservatives.
User avatar
cliffski
Positech Staff
Positech Staff
Posts: 7969
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:27 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Postby cliffski » Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:27 am

because of its long term nature, maybe a dilemma on monarchy funding would be a better way to handle the issue?
User avatar
Xune
Senior Line Worker
Senior Line Worker
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:30 pm

Postby Xune » Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:34 am

I propose a series of nationalization policies. Make it possible to nationalize assets such as Public Transport, Rail Networks, Telecoms, Banking you name it!

The policies would take years to implement, during which time they would be a drain on your economy. The slider would dictate how profitable you want the asset to be once the transition period has ended. Lowest representing no accountability, effectively state subsidized, a midpoint of breaking even and a high point of maximum profits (while still maintaining high standards of course) with profitability and customer satisfaction determined by the efficiency of the minister in charge.

Obviously this would annoy capitalists and the wealthy with more controversial enactments such as nationalising the oil or banking sectors causing considerable international tension.

What d'ya think?

Return to “Democracy 2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest